Footnotes to a Nation: The Systemic Denial of Indigenous Access to Education, Healthcare, and Identity in Malaysia

Human Rights Research Center
3 days ago
10 min read

Updated: 2 days ago

July 29, 2025

Introduction

Long before Malaysia was named, its rivers, forests, and mountains already echoed with the footsteps of its Indigenous peoples. These first gu8ardians of the land now find themselves among the most overlooked, making up 13.8 percent of the population. Despite this, they are still -overpassed by the privileges afforded to other ethnic groups. Indeed, Malaysia’s reputation as the cultural melting pot of Asia precedes it, with people from different religions and races living together in harmony, but this begs the question: can true harmony truly be achieved while one ethnic group struggles in silence? The indigenous groups in Malaysia are varied, with the Orang Asli (Malay for Native People) calling Peninsular Malaysia their home. On the other hand, Orang Asal are the natives of Sabah and Sarawak, the states located in East Malaysia.

The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) stated that there were 28 indigenous groups making up 71.2% of the Sarawak population, 43 ethnic groups in Sabah that make up 61.22% of the state’s local population, and 13% Orang Asli groups in Peninsular Malaysia. In a 2016 study conducted between the years of 1971 to 2008, only 714 Orang Asli were recorded to have completed their tertiary education in public universities, an alarming trend that illustrates how their development seems to have frozen in time and threatens to leave them in Malaysia’s shadows. Unfortunately, indigenous groups also have poor socioeconomic status, with 80% of them earning a meagre income that falls below the national average, and a mortality rate of children under 5 years old six times higher than the national average.

The 2020 UN Special Rapporteur report called for Malaysia’s poverty line to be raised, highlighting the country’s progress since independence in 1957. It also noted that indigenous groups were largely excluded from the Household Income and Basic Amenities Survey, suggesting that the poverty measurement among these communities may be higher than reported. The inferior, narrow and stereotypical views on indigenous communities in Malaysia only serve to exacerbate the situation and promote a biased narrative that diminishes the number of opportunities provided to them. This article aims to unveil the silent fractures in Malaysia’s promise of equality, where indigenous rights are too often acknowledged in word, but not in will.

Distribution of the major native groups from Peninsular Malaysia and Borneo [Image Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358176905_The_Peopling_and_Migration_History_of_the_Natives_in_Peninsular_Malaysia_and_Borneo_A_Glimpse_on_the_Studies_Over_the_Past_100_years] — *Distribution of the major native groups from Peninsular Malaysia and Borneo* [Image Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358176905_The_Peopling_and_Migration_History_of_the_Natives_in_Peninsular_Malaysia_and_Borneo_A_Glimpse_on_the_Studies_Over_the_Past_100_years]

Bureaucratic Erasure and the Legal Identity Crisis

At the heart of Malaysia’s indigenous rights struggle lies a profound crisis of legal identity, one that is shaped and sustained by a phenomenon known as bureaucratic erasure. Bureaucratic erasure, the systemic exclusion of indigenous communities from civil registration and citizenship processes, has rendered generations legally invisible. The absence of a MyKad, Malaysia’s compulsory identity card issued to citizens aged 12 and above, marks more than a missing document; it signifies a life lived outside the protections and privileges of legal recognition.

A MyKad is more than just a smart card containing an individual’s basic personal information such as name, date of birth, address, gender, and citizenship status, it confers a sense of security and legitimacy because with it comes access to healthcare, education, employment, the right to vote in Malaysian elections, and an overall sense of participation in society. While most people can easily obtain and carry their MyKad, many native peoples continue to face persistent and systemic barriers to accessing this essential form of identification.

For many indigenous communities in Malaysia, especially those who reside in remote or marginalized communities, where access to the outside world is rare, the lack of a MyKad is a denial of their own personhood in the eyes of the state. The concept of legal personhood is established under international human rights law, specifically under Article 16 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 6 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). In neglecting to acknowledge their rights and identities, the state perpetuates an injustice that stains the very fabric of human dignity. Without this single document, indigenous children are unable to enroll in schools, and the vulnerable cannot obtain medical treatment in government hospitals, especially in cases of medical emergencies, making the native rates of mortality even higher compared to the general population. Healthcare provided by government hospitals in Malaysia is very affordable as it is highly subsidized by the government. This means that the average Malaysian generally pays low to zero fees for healthcare, in line with the understanding that healthcare should be a universal right and charging exorbitant fees for basic treatment would be inhumane. As a Malaysian citizen, only an RM 1 (equivalent to 0.24 USD at the time of writing) fee is incurred when choosing to consult a doctor.

Without citizenship, indigenous communities are forced to seek help from Good Samaritans and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) who work at the grassroots level to settle their medical fees. This legal identity crisis is perpetuated by systemic barriers such as logistical hurdles in rural regions, language gaps, and intergenerational mistrust of state authorities. Many children are born in villages far from state hospitals or clinics, resulting in unregistered births, continuing the cycle that is incredibly difficult to break out of. During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic that led to the loss of millions of Malaysian lives, the rate of unregistered births in indigenous communities has been propagated to be even higher. Others, despite being born in Malaysia and to Malaysian parents, are denied documentation due to unclear or inconsistently applied laws governing citizenship, particularly in cases of statelessness of mixed parentage.

The protection of indigenous communities are covered by Articles 73, 74(1) and 74(2) of the Malaysian Federal Constitution, with both the federal and state legislatures having jurisdiction over the administration of the Orang Asal. Depending on the subject matter, the administration of the Orang Asal could either fall under the federal or state jurisdiction, or could form the matter under both legislatures at the same time. Internationally, the fundamental rights of indigenous communities are enshrined under the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) which aims to ensure that their right to self-determination, cultural preservation, and access to resources are protected.

Further complicating the issue are the National Registration Act 1959 and the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1957, which regulate citizen registration but fall short in accommodating the realities faced by indigenous communities. This denial raises a profound and unsettling question: does the absence of legal personhood diminish their worth as human beings, or does it merely expose the failures of a system that refuses to see them as equals? The answer to this question is simple: the lack of citizenship is by no means a reflection of their worth as human beings but is the failure of legal and political systems to recognize their identities. This failure underscores a critical gap between Malaysia’s constitutional promises and its practical application. To address this, more pragmatic legal reforms should be undertaken to embrace indigenous modes of identity verification.

Lessons from Other Jurisdictions

To effectively address the crisis of legal identity and the invisible, slow erasure of native peoples’ existence in national legal systems, it is important to obtain lessons from other jurisdictions that have significantly advanced frameworks for recognizing and protecting indigenous rights. For instance, New Zealand is a good example of a country that has developed a comprehensive model to protect its indigenous community through the Treaty of Waitangi, a foundational document that establishes a formal partnership between the Crown and Māori as the original rightful owners of the land.

Although the treaty is no stranger to legally unsound and morally flawed attempts by politicians to alter its foundations, the Treaty of Waitangi remains the embodiment of New Zealand’s commitment to recognizing Māori rights and building a just partnership between indigenous peoples and the state. Besides affirming Māori rights to cultural preservation and self-determination, it also provides a legal basis for redress through institutions such as the Waitangi Tribunal -This tribunal allows communities to bring claims against the government regarding breaches of the Treaty, fostering opportunities for accountability and dialogue. Malaysia should adopt the spirit enshrined in the Treaty in order to clarify the ambiguous jurisdictional divide between federal and state governments over indigenous affairs.

Having such a framework would offer undisputed and stronger rights to indigenous communities leading to a reduction in administrative overlaps. Canada provides another instructive example, particularly with its efforts to improve legal recognition and citizenship documentation for indigenous communities. The Canadian government has implemented community-based birth registration programs and mobile registration units to reach First Nations communities, acknowledging that geographical and logistical barriers often impede proper documentation processes available to other communities. Malaysia should replicate this by establishing mobile registration initiatives tailored to the needs of Orang Asli life, coupled with legal reforms that recognize how indigenous customary laws affect their viewpoint, instead of forcing them into a tiny, rigid and arbitrary box.

By integrating these lessons, Malaysia can begin to close the large gap between constitutional promises and lived realities. Clearer legal protections and genuine interest in the participation of indigenous communities are vital towards restoring their dignity and affirming their rightful place in Malaysian society.

Conclusion

The concept of Malaysian unity is enshrined under the slogan 1Malaysia, known nationwide in the Malay language as Satu Malaysia, introduced with the intention of eradicating division between the many races, but how can true unity truly be achieved if one ethnic minority continues to suffer in silence? At this juncture, it is evident that more efforts need to be directed towards improving the visibility of indigenous communities in Malaysia, lest their voices fade into the shadow of a nation that forgets its oldest custodians. One quote from the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development resonates deeply: “As we embark on this great collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind.” The heart of this quote challenges Malaysia to rise above its current shortcomings to protect each and every one of us, because at the end of the day, we are human first and Malaysians second.

Glossary

Ambiguous: Having or expressing more than one possible meaning, sometimes intentionally
Amenities: Something, such as a swimming pool or shopping centre, that is intended to make life more pleasant or comfortable for the people in a town, hotel, or other place
Arbitrary: Based on chance rather than being planned or based on reason
Bureaucracy: A system for controlling or managing a country, company, or organization that is operated by a large number of officials employed to follow rules carefully
Compulsory: If something is compulsory, you must do it because of a rule or law
Cultural melting pot: A place where many different people and ideas exist together, often mixing and producing something new
Custodians: People with the responsibility for protecting or taking care of something or keeping something in good condition
Diminish: To reduce or be reduced in size or importance
Exacerbate: To make something that is already bad even worse
Exorbitant: High prices, demands, etc. that are much too large
Footnotes: Notes printed at the bottom of a page that gives extra information about something that has been written on that page
Impede: To make it more difficult for something to happen or more difficult for someone to do something
Inferior: Not good, or not as good as someone or something else
Juncture: A particular point in time
Jurisdiction: A country, state, or other area where a particular set of laws or rules must be obeyed
Legislatures: The group of people in a country or part of a country who have the power to make and change laws
Marginalized communities: Groups and communities that experience discrimination and exclusion (social, political, and economic)
Meagre: Of amounts or numbers, very small or not enough
Peninsular: Consisting of or relating to a peninsula (a long piece of land that sticks out from a larger area of land into the sea or into a lake)
Perpetuates: To cause something to continue
Personhood: The state of being a person
Phenomenon: Something that exists and can be seen, felt, tasted, etc., especially something unusual or interesting
Pragmatic: Solving problems in a sensible way that suits the conditions that really exist now, rather than obeying fixed theories, ideas, or rules
Privileges: Advantages that only one person or group of people has, usually because of their position or because they are rich
Rigid: Not permitting any change
Self-determination: The ability or power to make decisions for yourself, especially the power of a nation to decide how it will be governed
Slogan: A short easily remembered phrase, especially one used to advertise an idea or a product
Socioeconomic: Related to the differences between groups of people caused mainly by their financial situation
Statelessness: The situation where a person is not considered as a national by any state under the operation of its law
Stereotypical: Conforming to a fixed or general pattern or type especially when of an oversimplified or prejudiced nature: of, relating to, or constituting a stereotype
Subsidized: Paid for partly by the government or another organization
Systemic: Relating to or affecting the whole of a system, organization, etc. rather than just some parts of it
Tertiary: Relating to education in colleges and universities
Tribunal: A court or forum of justice